View Full Version : Another Bush Lie Exposed
No probe was ever launched to discover who leaked Valerie Plame's name to the press. Either it was an intentional leak or someone is covering up for Karl Rove or both. The promise to fire anyone involved was just another fabrication. As I suspected. That damn Chimpy lied again.
NEW YORK Dr. James Knodell, director of the Office of Security at the White House, told a congressional committee today that he was aware of no internal investigation or report into the leak of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame.
The White House had first opposed Knodell testifying but after a threat of a subpoena from the committee yesterday he was allowed to appear today.
Knodell said that he had started at the White House in August 2004, a year after the leak, but his records show no evidence of a probe or report there: "I have no knowledge of any investigation in my office," he said.
Rep. Waxman recalled that President Bush had promised a full internal probe. Knodell repeated that no probe took place, as far as he knew, and was not happening today.
Knodell said he had "no" conversations whatsoever with the president, vice president, Karl Rove or anyone about the leak.
Asked by chairman Rep. Henry Waxman if he knew this was an issue of concern, he said "yes." Asked if he learned this from the White House or the press, he said, "through the press."
Knodell testified that those who had participated in the leaking of classified information were required to own up to this and he was not aware that anyone, including Karl Rove, had done that.
Rep. Elijah Cummings said all of this was "shocking" and said that Knodell's office's lack of action was a "breach within a breach." Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton called this a "dereliction of duty."
Knodell, who is a career employee and not a Bush appointee, said he would go back and "review this with senior management." He admitted that leaking classified information called for action, whether the leak was accidental or on purpose.
Democrats challenged his assertion that no probe was necessary since a criminal investigation was underway. They said that the criminal probe was narrowly focused, started well after the leak -- during which the White House apparently did nothing -- and that in any case, the White House was required to carry out its own probe and deny security clearances to anyone who had leaked classified information.
They demanded to know why Rove's security clearance had not been revoked.
Rep. Waxman at one point said that he regretted not being able to put up a video of the president promising a full probe but added, "I guess we will leave that to The Daily Show."~link~ (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003559300)
wonder cow
03-20-2007, 08:23 AM
Rep. Waxman at one point said that he regretted not being able to put up a video of the president promising a full probe but added, "I guess we will leave that to The Daily Show."
http://www.websmileys.com/sm/happy/077.gif
CheesyMuslim
03-20-2007, 12:15 PM
Soor bout that,
1. It was Novak, no body within the Administration leaked, thats been proven already.
2. Libby got caught with a *Imperfect Memory*.
3. I couldn't tell you what I wrote here last week.
4. Another man named Armatage, ranks high in this leak, but shoot, I hear he's a liberal, and he gets a free pass.
Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
BoogyMan
03-20-2007, 12:16 PM
A R M I T A G E, say it with me kids.
The president promised a full probe. No such probe was ever launched. Liar.
BoogyMan
03-20-2007, 04:25 PM
Once again, you can do it..... say it with me, A R M I T A G E. Fitzgerald did a full probe.
But no probe was ever launched in the White House as a result of the leak of classified information.
Knodell testified that those who had participated in the leaking of classified information were required to own up to this and he was not aware that anyone, including Karl Rove, had done that.
He promised that whoever was involved would be fired. Rove was involved. He's still collecting a paycheck. Bush lied.
BoogyMan
03-20-2007, 05:10 PM
But no probe was ever launched in the White House as a result of the leak of classified information.
So now there is supposed to be ANOTHER probe specifically based in the whitehouse. I see.
He promised that whoever was involved would be fired. Rove was involved. He's still collecting a paycheck. Bush lied.
"You know about that" equates to an intentional leak? Spin away ECW.
the White House was required to carry out its own probe and deny security clearances to anyone who had leaked classified information.
He didn't. Bush lied.
ECW......don't you get tired of banging your head against the wall? These two think that since an investigation was made by Fitzpatrick that absolves Bush from lying saying he was going to have an internal ivestigation done. You've said it 4 times now and they still keep evading and changing the subject.
CheesyMuslim
03-21-2007, 02:46 AM
Sorry bout that,
1. Bottom line is, this new house is full of cr@p.
2. They want to waste time and money, digging.
3. Hoping to catch Carl Rove in a slight contradictory statement.
4. To try like hell to bring him down.
5. They fear Carl Rove, more than any Republican on Earth.
6. Rove the MasterMind.
7. He is pulling your strings neolibs, and your so tired of being jerked around, I know.
8. Rove will finish his term, then lay the noelibs out to dry, with constant books, to lay you folks to waste.
Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
BoogyMan
03-21-2007, 02:49 AM
the White House was required to carry out its own probe and deny security clearances to anyone who had leaked classified information.
He didn't. Bush lied.
Answer the question ECW. "You know about that" equates to a leak?
If Bush promised an internal investigation and didn't get it done he should take the heat for it, but your continued assertion that Rove was the leaker is simply dishonest.
A R M I T A G E.
Elrathin
03-21-2007, 02:52 AM
Boogy, why doesn't Rove, Cheney and company just submit to questioning under oath and clear up this entire mess? Could it be they have something to hide?
BoogyMan
03-21-2007, 02:56 AM
Boogy, why doesn't Rove, Cheney and company just submit to questioning under oath and clear up this entire mess? Could it be they have something to hide?
Could it be that they know there will never be a fair and non-partisan session of questioning where truth is more important that political hackery? We both know the answer to that one El.
Elrathin
03-21-2007, 03:01 AM
Could it be that they know there will never be a fair and non-partisan session of questioning where truth is more important that political hackery? We both know the answer to that one El.
If they tell the truth, there is nothing to hide Boogy. Remember, THEY are the ones saying they are in the right. Sounds like someone has reservations if they are actually doing the right thing.
Their questioning couldn't uncover something such as a blowjob in the whitehouse could it Boogy? :D
BoogyMan
03-21-2007, 03:13 AM
If they tell the truth, there is nothing to hide Boogy. Remember, THEY are the ones saying they are in the right. Sounds like someone has reservations if they are actually doing the right thing.
Their questioning couldn't uncover something such as a blowjob in the whitehouse could it Boogy? :D
No-one said anything about hiding something El. The whole point is that no matter what is said the left will twist it for political purposes. Remember the LEFTIES are the ones saying they are lying even in the face of Fitzgerald not filing a single related charge after a long and detailed investigation. Sounds like someone is desperate to make up some kind of charge since they didn't get to have Fitzmas.
You consistently mistake the search for the truth as "desperation." Your boy Chimpy is getting desperate by invoking executive privilege in not allowing Rove to testify. Bubba let his advisors testify before a hostile congress. What does Rove have to hide? You know the answer to that as well as the rest of us: everything.
Elrathin
03-21-2007, 01:09 PM
Sounds like someone is desperate to make up some kind of charge since they didn't get to have Fitzmas.
If they tell the truth, they have nothing to worry about.
BoogyMan
03-21-2007, 01:15 PM
Sounds like someone is desperate to make up some kind of charge since they didn't get to have Fitzmas.
If they tell the truth, they have nothing to worry about.
That is like saying that if you toss someone into a pit of hungry bears that if they don't act like food they have nothing to worry about.
I trust the liberal congress at about the same level you trust the administration.
CheesyMuslim
03-21-2007, 02:17 PM
Sorry bout that,
1. But this new congress wants Rove on any issue.
2. When did you learn about this whole mess Mr. Rove?
3. Then they try to prove like hell that it was before.
4. Some neolib says, " I told him before that"
5. Then its, "You Lied!"
6. We have seen this with Scooter, and now they want Mr. Rove, *The MasterMind*.
Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
Buck Laser
03-21-2007, 03:19 PM
I trust the liberal congress at about the same level you trust the administration.
Liberal congress? WHAT liberal congress? There's a democratic majority, but that hardly makes it "liberal." At most, it's a centrist congress with a small democratic majority. Try telling the truth for a while. You'll find it a refreshing change. You'll even sleep better at night.:P
BoogyMan
03-21-2007, 04:42 PM
I trust the liberal congress at about the same level you trust the administration.
Liberal congress? WHAT liberal congress? There's a democratic majority, but that hardly makes it "liberal." At most, it's a centrist congress with a small democratic majority. Try telling the truth for a while. You'll find it a refreshing change. You'll even sleep better at night.:P
Hahahahah. Thanks Buck, I appreciate your input.
I trust the liberal congress at about the same level you trust the administration.
Liberal congress? WHAT liberal congress? There's a democratic majority, but that hardly makes it "liberal." At most, it's a centrist congress with a small democratic majority. Try telling the truth for a while. You'll find it a refreshing change. You'll even sleep better at night.:P
Hahahahah. Thanks Buck, I appreciate your input.
Is this the same Congress that your buddies over at Fox were telling us last November was full of conservative Democrats and now, magically, it's a Liberal Congress?
Hahahahah. Thanks, Boogy! I needed a laugh before lunch.
BoogyMan
03-21-2007, 09:19 PM
Is this the same Congress that your buddies over at Fox were telling us last November was full of conservative Democrats and now, magically, it's a Liberal Congress?
Hahahahah. Thanks, Boogy! I needed a laugh before lunch.
My buddies at Fox? Logical fallacy seems to about here today.
This just gets better and better. LOL
Stoner
03-21-2007, 09:21 PM
Liberal congress? WHAT liberal congress?
The do-nothings that are in there now. Although I admit it is hard to tell how far to the left they lean when they work only a couple hours a day.
Buck Laser
03-21-2007, 10:07 PM
Liberal congress? WHAT liberal congress?
The do-nothings that are in there now. Although I admit it is hard to tell how far to the left they lean when they work only a couple hours a day.
The last I heard, they were working longer hours than they did under Dumb Denny Hastert. You got a source for your claim that they only work a coupla hours a day? Committee meetings don't count?
Wait...I know what you're doing. You expect US to believe whatever right wing medium you got that from, right? News for ya, boyo: nearly ALL liberals are literate.:cool:
Is this the same Congress that your buddies over at Fox were telling us last November was full of conservative Democrats and now, magically, it's a Liberal Congress?
Hahahahah. Thanks, Boogy! I needed a laugh before lunch.
My buddies at Fox? Logical fallacy seems to about here today.
This just gets better and better. LOL
Does that logical fallacy extend to the lies that your neocon president told?
BoogyMan
03-21-2007, 11:25 PM
Is this the same Congress that your buddies over at Fox were telling us last November was full of conservative Democrats and now, magically, it's a Liberal Congress?
Hahahahah. Thanks, Boogy! I needed a laugh before lunch.
My buddies at Fox? Logical fallacy seems to about here today.
This just gets better and better. LOL
Does that logical fallacy extend to the lies that your neocon president told?
I think I will start a count of your usage of the word Neocon just to amuse myself ECW, should be fun.
What lies are those ECW? Be specific.
Sorry bout that,
1. But this new congress wants Rove on any issue.
2. When did you learn about this whole mess Mr. Rove?
3. Then they try to prove like hell that it was before.
4. Some neolib says, " I told him before that"
5. Then its, "You Lied!"
6. We have seen this with Scooter, and now they want Mr. Rove, *The MasterMind*.
Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
Well Chess a record of this would stop that.
I still think there are more important things to do than to draw the line in the sand with this issue, but it will set a precedence.
Is this the same Congress that your buddies over at Fox were telling us last November was full of conservative Democrats and now, magically, it's a Liberal Congress?
Hahahahah. Thanks, Boogy! I needed a laugh before lunch.
My buddies at Fox? Logical fallacy seems to about here today.
This just gets better and better. LOL
Does that logical fallacy extend to the lies that your neocon president told?
I think I will start a count of your usage of the word Neocon just to amuse myself ECW, should be fun.
What lies are those ECW? Be specific.
Go back to the first post in this thread. That's just for starters. You want more? A bigger list, perhaps? To refresh your memory or to see if I've been keeping track? Your boy George has made it a habit of lying since before he became president. Becoming president only made it worse. He is the quintessential neocon. (That's one.)
BoogyMan
03-22-2007, 12:15 PM
ECW, I asked you for proof of lies, not conjecture or your desire to make something the president said to be a lie because you don't have all the facts. Proof, rock solid proof. I won't hold my breath.
Stoner
03-22-2007, 03:15 PM
I won't hold my breath.
Unless your body does not require oxygen I don't reccomend that either.
ECW, I asked you for proof of lies, not conjecture or your desire to make something the president said to be a lie because you don't have all the facts. Proof, rock solid proof. I won't hold my breath.
My conjecture had nothing to do with it. This thread is pretty straight forward but then I'm not surprised that the word of a man working in the White House isn't good enough for you. It hasn't been good enough for me for about six years now but then we're no longer talking about Dr Knodell now, are we?
As far as proof goes, you were given proof that Ms Plame was covert direct from testimony and you rejected that. You were shown in the law how she was covert and you rejected that. You were shown how privatization caused the scandalous conditions at Building 18 and you rejected that. You were shown that the hit piece printed in the NYT about Al Gore was writiten in part by an oil industry lobbyist and you rejected that.
Lately, it seems that you have been enamored with your new-found status as a neocon and you refuse to accept anything that is critical of anyone who is a neocon especially if the person being critical is not a neocon. This has a more scientific name (which you will no doubt reject as well) called Neocon Obliviousness Tendencies or NOT. You seem to have developed a pretty serious case of NOT and I hope you get treated for it soon. The real world is passing you by.
BoogyMan
03-22-2007, 05:11 PM
Where are the charges against one of the evil white house officials ECW? Where?
Where are the charges against one of the evil white house officials ECW? Where?
You posted this protest in the wrong thread. This one is about the ignorant liar George Walker Bush.
This has a more scientific name (which you will no doubt reject as well) called Neocon Obliviousness Tendencies or NOT. You seem to have developed a pretty serious case of NOT and I hope you get treated for it soon. The real world is passing you by.
ECW..........that is brilliant!:D
This has a more scientific name (which you will no doubt reject as well) called Neocon Obliviousness Tendencies or NOT. You seem to have developed a pretty serious case of NOT and I hope you get treated for it soon. The real world is passing you by.
ECW..........that is brilliant!:D
I'm not a doctor (and I don't play one on TV) so it took me a while to figure out why none of the neocons here could accept any criticism even when proof was provided. Finally, I figured out that in was just a seriously bad case of the NOTs. Not much you can do about it except ignore it and hope it goes away.
BoogyMan
03-22-2007, 11:23 PM
I'm not a doctor (and I don't play one on TV) so it took me a while to figure out why none of the neocons here could accept any criticism even when proof was provided. Finally, I figured out that in was just a seriously bad case of the NOTs. Not much you can do about it except ignore it and hope it goes away.
You actually typed this without any self examination?????
BWahahahahahahahahahahahhaha.
Stoner
03-22-2007, 11:35 PM
I'm not a doctor (and I don't play one on TV) so it took me a while to figure out why none of the neocons here could accept any criticism even when proof was provided. Finally, I figured out that in was just a seriously bad case of the NOTs. Not much you can do about it except ignore it and hope it goes away.
You actually typed this without any self examination?????
BWahahahahahahahahahahahhaha.
Ironic, huh?
I'm not a doctor (and I don't play one on TV) so it took me a while to figure out why none of the neocons here could accept any criticism even when proof was provided. Finally, I figured out that in was just a seriously bad case of the NOTs. Not much you can do about it except ignore it and hope it goes away.
You actually typed this without any self examination?????
BWahahahahahahahahahahahhaha.
Ironic, huh?
It would be if I was a neocon. But, sadly for your side, I'm not.
Liberals/Democrats on this board provide proof of their statements and claims. The same cannot be said for all but one of the neocons (that's you, Boogy). The rest of the neocons couldn't grab any proof if it was nestled in their scrotums.
Achilles
03-30-2007, 04:30 AM
Even though Im anti-Bush, ECW, You could try making a better argument than "Bush Lied, I swear it"
Even though Im anti-Bush, ECW, You could try making a better argument than "Bush Lied, I swear it"
I did, fella. It's right here. (http://www.democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=4024&pid=45006#pid45006)
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.